Zombies, malls and the consumerism debate

[darth los]

I actually wrote a paper for my english class with this article as my main source material way back in 04'. We were asked to select an actor or director and write a paper on three films they were involved in. I picked GAR of course. ( Guess which 3 films I picked?) This is virtually the only article i've ever read which takes the films and they message they try to convey seriously and not tounge in cheek. They make arguements much in the same vein that philly swat would. i got an A on the paper by the way. It's rather long, some 20 pages some of which cease to be relavent to the films. However, the relevant material brought up some good points and observations, some of which i've never heard brought up before. Although If your board easily or have a short attention span, i guess this article is not for you.

Happy reading. :D


http://www.americanpopularculture.com/journal/articles/fall_2002/harper.htm

[MissJacksonCA]

nice read... damn I hate pop culture

[Philly_SWAT]

They make arguements much in the same vein that philly swat would.While I appreciate the comment, I would have to disagree, somewhat. While I try to be both logical and thorough in my arguments, I do not try to overly impress people by using "big words" every other sentence. To do so seems pretencious, and makes what you say (or write) hard for some in your desired audience to understand (or even care about). The author does makes some interesting points, however, I think he is overreaching in many points, and just plain wrong in others. One of my favorite quotes is when he is discussing the scene where Stephen has a loaf of bread, and Peter then shows a bigger one:


Both men laugh, implicitly recognizing an analogy of anatomical comparison.Did anyone here on this board ever take that scene this way? Does anyone think Romero intended that scene to be taken at all that way? And I thought that I over-intrepreted Dawn at times......

[EvilNed]

If we had a Papal institution for over-interpreting Dawn of the Dead, Philly Swat would be pope. That said, darth los could very well be a bishop or a priest at least!

As for darth los being "wrong" on some aspects, there's no such thing in film theory. Nobody is right or wrong. And Romero's films are begged to be analyzed. Heck, I've got two books by Steve Neale right here next to me, and that guy is such a Romero freak he'd outshine us all.

[darth los]

While I appreciate the comment, I would have to disagree, somewhat. While I try to be both logical and thorough in my arguments, I do not try to overly impress people by using "big words" every other sentence. To do so seems pretencious, and makes what you say (or write) hard for some in your desired audience to understand (or even care about). The author does makes some interesting points, however, I think he is overreaching in many points, and just plain wrong in others. One of my favorite quotes is when he is discussing the scene where Stephen has a loaf of bread, and Peter then shows a bigger one:

Did anyone here on this board ever take that scene this way? Does anyone think Romero intended that scene to be taken at all that way? And I thought that I over-intrepreted Dawn at times......


Well, whatever you have to say about the opinios of the author of that article you can't deny that he definitely put alot of thought into and carefully analyzed it. As it pertains to loaf of bread scene, no, before the article i had never seen it like that. However,it never made sense to me. I mean what's so funny aboat having a bigger loaf of bread? That could have definitely been what was being implied. As ned said, The way gar makes his films, so much is left for the fans to interpret on their own. Sometimes a loaf of bread is just a loaf of bread, i know, but how many hours have we spent debating our theories of different scenes of these films? Who's to say he's wrong? Who's to say land isn't after day? :p I'd love to see him debate you on these forums though. that would be interesting.

[Philly_SWAT]

As for darth los being "wrong" on some aspects, there's no such thing in film theory.
Interesting comment. I seem to remember a long discussion with you where you said that I was "wrong" on just about everything I said. And as I also seem to remember, you were not very careful on the points you making there, as you are not very careful as to what you are saying here. I never said that darth_los was wrong, but the author of the article he provided a link to. I have not read darth-los's paper, but would be more than happy to.

[darth los]

I don't ever think that anyone here is wrong about their takes on this films except in the most extreme cases. As i've said before, GAR'S films purposely lend themselves to speculation because so much is left for us to interpret ourselves. That's the definition of interpretation, your take on a given subject matter.

[coma]

As it pertains to loaf of bread scene, no, before the article i had never seen it like that. However,it never made sense to me. I mean what's so funny aboat having a bigger loaf of bread?
I always thought it was "when you can have anything you want, go for the greed" fitting into the theme of the film.

I had Film analysis classes and I always went for the hyperbole. Profs dig that big time. I did a five page paper comparing a John Ford/John Wayne film (cant remember which western. It was in 1987) to Leni Refenstal's Triumph of the Will. Do I think John Ford is a Nazi style propagandist? Hell no. But I knew prof would like the Indian genocide stuff and all the over the top comparisons in general concerning John Waynes Stoicness to the Third Reich uberman. I got an A but I wouldnt post it on the web either. I basically played to his politics to get a grade. And, I must admit, writing all that crap was a lot of fun, cause it was so absurd. Plus I was 19 :)

[darth los]

lol :lol: Good stuff. That's exactly what i did. My prof was so impressed and said that she read the same journal that I used as my source material often. SCORE!! :D I didn't agree with alot of what the author said either but i knew she would dig it. I have to admit though, the author brought up manydifferent perspectives on dawn that i had never even considered and That's never a bad thing.

[Danny]

i swear i saw george on tv the othr day and he said "its amazing how many people see dawn as a commentary on consumerism in the time, rather than just another cheap horror film", i reckon he was a little proud when he said that:cool:

[darth los]

i swear i saw george on tv the othr day and he said "its amazing how many people see dawn as a commentary on consumerism in the time, rather than just another cheap horror film", i reckon he was a little proud when he said that:cool:

I think he definitely is proud. But i also think he's shocked as hell, and honored for that matter, that people would read this deeply into that film. Which by the way is the crown jewel of his career. He's like "yeah i meant to do that.":rolleyes:

[triste realtà]

http://broonsbane.tripod.com/dawnmain.htm says

In the original draft, a pregnant woman and her man refuge in an abandoned shopping mall where they discover the military is trucking in supplies human flesh and storing them in the mall freezers. Only half the script was finished. Romero told Prevue, "Dawn had certain viewpoint about society eating itself alive in the rush to consume material goods. We’re digesting the planet on our way to a genocidal end."

[darth los]

http://broonsbane.tripod.com/dawnmain.htm says

And with the realization of global warming and that our fossil fuels won't last indefinitely how profetic does that sound today? Al gore's got nothing on GAR.:sneaky:

[EvilNed]

Interesting comment. I seem to remember a long discussion with you where you said that I was "wrong" on just about everything I said. And as I also seem to remember, you were not very careful on the points you making there, as you are not very careful as to what you are saying here. I never said that darth_los was wrong, but the author of the article he provided a link to. I have not read darth-los's paper, but would be more than happy to.

You seem to remember that, do you? Interestingly how many things can turn out that way when taken out of context.

[darth los]

If we had a Papal institution for over-interpreting Dawn of the Dead, Philly Swat would be pope. That said, darth los could very well be a bishop or a priest at least!


Gee, you really think so!! :D I'll take that as a compliment, thank you very much. However I think this guy takes the cake. Never the less he made some interesting observations that i can't just disregaurd.

He describes the zeds as "walking symbols of any oppressed social group. This function is derived in part from their origins in the literature and cinema of the twentieth century, in which zombies are synonymous with oppression and slavery." He further makes the observation that "Romero uses zombies because, as part of a maligned cinematic underclass, they suit his satirical purpose. Both Dawn of the Dead and its successor Day of the Dead (1985) present the human survivors of the zombie plague as literally and etymologically "living over" the zombies. In Romero's trilogy, Captain Rhodes — the sadistic army commander of Day of the Dead — expresses the strongest contempt for the undead, regarding them as a disposable and despicable underclass." Now while i may not agree with him, those interpretations certainly make sense.

I'm just all for getting new things out of the film that i never knew were there. this article helped me do that.

[EvilNed]

Gee, you really think so!! :D I'll take that as a compliment, thank you very much. However I think this guy takes the cake. Never the less he made some interesting observations that i can't just disregaurd.


Mostly meant in jest of course. But truth be told YOU NEED TO SHAPE UP! You've got LOTS AND LOTS of over-analysing to do before I'm in anyway pleased with your performance.

Diiiismiiiissed!

[darth los]

I'll work on it right away comrade. I won't stop till' i'm the pope of this sh8t. :sneaky:

[Philly_SWAT]

You seem to remember that, do you? Interestingly how many things can turn out that way when taken out of context.I'll be honest, I dont get what you mean here. I do see that you did not actually respond to what I said, about you commenting on me saying darth_los was wrong, and me saying I was reffering to the articles's author.

[EvilNed]

I'll be honest, I dont get what you mean here.

Probably helps if you read the quoted message. If not, i can't help you.

[darth los]

It's getting chippy in here. :shifty:

[Philly_SWAT]

It's getting chippy in here. :shifty:
Indeed it is. But this is exactly how our long conversation went. Instead of actually intelligently debating the issue, he resorted to insults and sarcasm. Now I admit, that I had a small amount of sarcasm as well, but that was after getting exasperated with his..... "discussion method".

As far as his quote goes, obviously I read it, and I admitted that I didnt understand what he meant. He comes back with "Probably helps if you read the quoted message. If not, i can't help you." I dont know by that if he meant his explanation skills are so poor that he cant further expand on a one sentence point, or that the point was so poorly made to begin with that any explanation would be impossible. I suspect that I may never know. If so, I will not lose any sleep over it. More than likely, his comment meant that he felt I was too stupid to understand his brilliant, well thought-out comment. I tend to think it shows more intelligence to be able to back up ones ideas with supporting arguments, rather than resort to "well, I guess you are too stupid to understand" type statements. Thats just me I guess.

[mista_mo]

He means you took the situation out of context.


and you used "exasperated"....perhaps to make yourself look smarter? Oh burn, caught you in your own trap noob.

(i am being sarcastic btw and don't mean the 2nd sentance)

[darth los]

He means you took the situation out of context.


and you used "exasperated"....perhaps to make yourself look smarter? Oh burn, caught you in your own trap noob.

(i am being sarcastic btw and don't mean the 2nd sentance)

That's something that's been going on a while. Don't get involved mo. Laters !! :D